Tenancy disputes over agricultural land must be referred to statutory authorities once properly framed; civil courts lack jurisdiction.

Where a tenancy issue concerning agricultural land is properly raised in a suit, the civil court has no jurisdiction to decide that question and must refer it to the statutory authorities under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, with the suit stayed pending determination. The court cannot insist on prima facie evidence before making the reference once the issue is framed. However, Order 14 CPC requires a material proposition to be properly pleaded and denied, so a bare or vague plea of tenancy should not ordinarily be framed as an issue unless basic particulars of the alleged tenancy are given. The revisions were allowed and reference was required.

---

---

Issues: Whether, once a tenancy issue concerning agricultural land is raised in the suit, the civil court is bound to refer that issue to the authorities under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, and whether the court may first require prima facie evidence before making such reference; and whether a vague plea of tenancy justifies framing the issue at all.

Analysis: Section 35 bars the civil court from deciding the question whether a person is a tenant of agricultural land, and Section 35-A makes reference of such an issue to the statutory authorities obligatory, with the suit to be stayed. Reading Sections 85 and 85-A together, the question of tenancy is removed from the civil court's jurisdiction and must be decided by the authorities under the Act. At the same time, Order 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure permits an issue only when a material proposition is properly affirmed and denied; therefore, a bare or vague plea of tenancy should not ordinarily lead to framing of such an issue unless the party gives basic particulars such as the time, author, and terms of the alleged tenancy.

Conclusion: Once the tenancy issue was framed, the civil court had no discretion to insist on prima facie evidence before reference and was bound to refer the issue to the statutory authorities.

Final Conclusion: The revisions succeeded and the trial court was required to make a reference of the tenancy issue to the competent authorities under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: A tenancy issue concerning agricultural land, once properly framed, must be referred by the civil court to the authorities under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, because the civil court lacks jurisdiction to determine that question itself.

---